exactly my point, robaggio. we have the illusion of free will no matter what the situation, but it is free will only of a second order. even if it appears free to us, we are still stuck with a lack of ability to choose other options and therefore a lack of truly free will.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by asaris
Say God knows that tomorrow I will drink a cup of coffee. This entails that necessarily I will drink a cup of coffee tomorrow. It does not entail that I will necessarily drink a cup of coffee tomorrow.
|
i am completely open to the possibility that i am missing the subtle distinction, but isnt what you just said a sort of "A but not A"? it both entails and does not entail the action?
furthermore, if the truth of a proposition (that in itself is an action) is necessary, but the completion of the proposition is not, we are stuck with a conflict. we cannot have a situation where it is true that we drank a cup of coffee this morning, but we didnt actually drink that cup of coffee. either the action happened, or the proposition was faulty.
meh, anyway, dont want to thread-jack this off topic. sorry